The Teach Me About Hockey Thread

[CuttyMarsh2012forOffice]

There is a European and American style of play. First off, euros and int'l games are played on Olympic ice. Some hockey players transfer from Euro to America and have a difficult time adjusting to the smaller american rink. Likewise for Americans, getting used to having to cover wider gaps and a more finesse style of play. I know this is cliche, but the American game is built off of aggressive and physical play at a faster pace with quicker decision making. the euro game is consisted of overall better passers with better stick handles and coordination. European danglers (aka Zetterberg and Datsyuk) have some incredible stick handling moves. Their country also created the greatest stick handling style called "Swedish Stickhandles." It looks like your carving a piece of art out of the ice with how smooth the Swedish stick handle are. Watch on the ice for variations of skill and style, Swedish stick handling rotates the puck in a circular pattern while American's stick moves side to side. That is a stereotype as individual players do what works best for them.

 

[CuttyMarsh2012forOffice]

There is a deke called the toe drag. It is the bread and butter move of great hockey players. Practice this move until it becomes one with your body and mind, you'll be scoring goals and making people look foolish. the toe drag can come off your forehand (the concave side of the stick at ) and the backhand (the convex part of the stick). Great players, like Patrick Kane, rely heavily on their backhand. the reason behind this is goalies have a hard time reading the backhand off of a shot on goal. the convex area combined with the whipping action of a backhand with throw a goalies positioning off. The forehand is the more consistent shot taken. the forehand has a faster release and you can control the puck better off of your forehand. Marian Hossa has a nasty toe drag.

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

This thread will definitely take over for my noob question threads when they pop up, which I appreciate.

Getting back to comparisons to basketball. I want to say it was the Devils, that did some pinch defense (not sure if they took that away), but for teams that have guys like Crosby/Malkin or Toews/Kane, is it possible to align yourself defensively in a box-and-1 style? Or if you have a team that is not so great offensively, that you put three people forward to start your break quicker?

 

[Ares]

As to the question about the sort of half-court defense.... so defense once your opponents has gotten inside your own blue line.

There are a variety of systems used by NHL teams and TBH I am far less versed in hockey defensive schemes than I would like.

Different schemes tend to take away different scoring methods on the ice.... some teams want to get the puck on net and look for a rebound they can smack in.... some teams want to screen the goalie and look for shots off the point to deflect in.... some teams want to try and get their snipers into the slot and take wrist shots..... every team will use some version of all of these methods during a game but some teams excel at one method over others.

Usually you will see your team on defense try hard not to let their opponent setup... get on the puck at all costs and just get it back out past your blue line because then all their players must tag up at the blue line or they are offsides. If you cannot manage this and they get setup then you get in to your defensive shell and look for opportunities to disrupt passing or attack puck carriers to try and get the puck back beyond your blue line.... in your defensive shell you will be looking to block shots, keep the screens off your goalie if you can, and like I said look for chances to attack puck carriers so you can get possession back and chip it out.

I cannot detail the ideas behind the defensive shells hockey teams use as its a bit beyond my knowledge at this point.

 

[DMelt36]

This thread will definitely take over for my noob question threads when they pop up, which I appreciate.

Getting back to comparisons to basketball. I want to say it was the Devils, that did some pinch defense (not sure if they took that away), but for teams that have guys like Crosby/Malkin or Toews/Kane, is it possible to align yourself defensively in a box-and-1 style? Or if you have a team that is not so great offensively, that you put three people forward to start your break quicker?

To my knowledge, teams don't use any sort of box-and-1 style defense against star players, although I could be wrong on that. What I do know is that teams do everything in their power to matchup their best defensive players against the other team's top lines in games, especially during postseason series. Not only will coaches throw out their best defensive pairing, each team typically has one forward line full of guys who are just as good at playing defensive hockey in their own end, so those lines will frequently match up against lines featuring names like Crosby, Malkin, Toews, Kane, etc. (Side note--this is why you rarely see Toews and Kane skating together for the Hawks with the exception of the power play. Q believes his team is harder to defend with those two split apart).

One key factor to keep in mine when talking about these matchups: it's much easier to do at home. NHL rules dictate that, when there's a stoppage in play, the visiting team makes its substitutions first, followed by the home team. Therefore, the home team can counter whatever line the visiting team throws onto the ice. When the Hawks are on the road and Toews' line is subbed in for a faceoff, you can bet the other team is throwing out its best defensive players in response. This is particularly crucial during the postseason.

 

[DMelt36]

Or if you have a team that is not so great offensively, that you put three people forward to start your break quicker?

I think the opposite is more true, actually.

Teams that don't have the speed that others do may elect to build a rush slowly through a series of passes--kinda like soccer teams build up possession on offense.

Quicker teams may have their forwards cheat up ice a bit in order to start a quick counter. This is something that the Hawks love to do, but it can be a double-edged sword as, at times, the Hawks forwards leave their own zone too quickly. Then, when the Hawks D-men get the puck, they don't have any easy pass options, so they go for a long-distance, low-accuracy pass that can be picked off and lead to a scoring chance at their own goal.

It's a beautiful thing when those long passes connect, and Brent Seabrook on the Hawks is particularly good at making them happen. But when they don't, the results likely aren't good.

 

[clonetrooper264]

I think the opposite is more true, actually.

Teams that don't have the speed that others do may elect to build a rush slowly through a series of passes--kinda like soccer teams build up possession on offense.

Quicker teams may have their forwards cheat up ice a bit in order to start a quick counter. This is something that the Hawks love to do, but it can be a double-edged sword as, at times, the Hawks forwards leave their own zone too quickly. Then, when the Hawks D-men get the puck, they don't have any easy pass options, so they go for a long-distance, low-accuracy pass that can be picked off and lead to a scoring chance at their own goal.

It's a beautiful thing when those long passes connect, and Brent Seabrook on the Hawks is particularly good at making them happen. But when they don't, the results likely aren't good.

Would it be accurate to say that the Hawks are a "run and gun" kind of team? Meaning they look to play fast, shoot lots of shots, and may sacrifice defense for a quick opportunity to score. It has certainly seemed that way from what I've seen from games and the comments here.

 

[clonetrooper264]

Also as a side note...my first thread in the Hawks forum got stickied. I feel honored. :turtle:

 

[HeHateMe]

Also as a side note...my first thread in the Hawks forum got stickied. I feel honored. :turtle:

It was ranked best thread of the day in all of CCS, by me.

You are welcome.

 

[Tjodalv]

How about a forechecking lesson? Forechecking: the process of attempting to regain the puck afer turning it over in your offensive zone. Basic forechecking concepts are generally spoken about in a numerical system that denotes the number of players attacking the puck carrier, the number assigned to block primary passing lanes, then the number retreating to the defensive zone. These are expressed as such: #-#-# (often followed by where the pressure should be applied in relation to your offensive zone).

Basic forechecking concepts from least pressure to most:

2-1-2 high (neutral zone trap) - made popular by the NJ Devils teams of the late 90s/early 00s, this relies on a heavily defensively minded C, solid positional D men, and great goaltending. The idea is to clog up the neutral zone with enough bodies to deny speed and passing lanes or force an offsides pass. This system of O to D transition was so effective that it led to the abolishment of the 2-line pass rule.

Once the puck is turned over all player begin retreating to the neutral zone in a formation that mirrors their defensive zone assignments. The Wingers will attack the puck carrier on their side of the ice once they near the blue line while every other player on the ice is responsible for cutting off passing lanes or attacking the receiver of a pass that enters into their area (the other winger is responsible for the quadrant opposite of the puck and fore of center ice, each D has their own quadrant aft of the center line, and the C patrols the middle).

1-1-3 high (left wing lock) - similar to the neutral zone trap, this is a passive form of forecheck that focuses on forcing poor passes in the neutral zone and denying entry into your defensive zone.

When the puck is turned over the LW retreats quickly in order to get into line with the 2 D men forming a line across your own blue line. The C attacks any puck carrier to the left side of the ice while the RW does the same on his side; the forward not attacking the puck covers whoever the nearest player on the opposing team is. The idea is to force the pass then double team the recipient.

1-2-2 (high/low) - High: the winger on the puck carriers side attacks the puck once it is above the faceoff circle while the other two forwards man up on the closest players and the D retreat into their areas in the neutral zone.

Low: the winger attacks the puck wherever it is on his side rather than retreating back to the above the circle to wait. This applies more pressure and forces quicker passes but also doesn't give the rest of your team time to find their man defensively

2-1-2 (high/low) - this is basically the same concept as the 1-2-2 except that the center helps double team the puck carrier with the winger. Again the high/low designation applies to where the pressure is applied. The purpose of this is more to try to strip the puck carrier himself rather than force a bad pass like most of the other checking schemes.

3-1-1/3-0-2 - only played when trying to tie the game up late in the 3rd period, this is basically full press where all the forwards attack the puck and one D man is responsible for preventing breakaways.

Now, again, these are just the basic ideas, so if you have any questions about execution or specifics about the concepts I'd be happy to elaborate.

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

^ solid post bc anytime my hockey buds talk about forechecking, "I'm like, yeah Bickell is great at that."

Usually I have to buy the next round bc of the looks I get.

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

Now, again, these are just the basic ideas, so if you have any questions about execution or specifics about the concepts I'd be happy to elaborate.

What determines what you use? Is it as simple as line matchups, or is there a call from the bench? I'm just thinking with how I've read hockey has gone the metric route, if you're in one forechecking formation, say 65% of the time, I'd think teams could start to exploit that.

 

[Tjodalv]

What determines what you use? Is it as simple as line matchups, or is there a call from the bench? I'm just thinking with how I've read hockey has gone the metric route, if you're in one forechecking formation, say 65% of the time, I'd think teams could start to exploit that.

They change it up according to line combination and what the situation is (score and time remaining). If you're down late in the game you up the pressure to try to force more time in their zone, but the trade off is that you give up more odd-man breaks).

Also, teams and coaches have their preferences depending on how they built their team: teams like Boston that have a bigger lineup will tend to play higher pressure schemes since their size gives them an advantage low in the opponent's defensive zone (outnumbering and digging the puck out of the corner) while teams more speed oriented like the Hawks tend to put more emphasis on getting back into defensive position then counter-attacking when they force a turnover (they tend to play 1-2-2s more than anything).

 

[clonetrooper264]

Offensively, how much of what we see are set plays? When I watch the Hawks, a lot of their offense seems frantic and mostly about getting the puck to the net area. Maybe this is because I have no idea what's going on. Plus you have guys being checked into the boards a lot so sometimes it's hard to keep track of what exactly is going on.

TLDR; how often do teams run set offensive plays?

 

[nwfisch]

The Kings play good hockey

/Thread

 

[clonetrooper264]

The Kings play good hockey

/Thread

:slap:

 

[Tjodalv]

Offensively, how much of what we see are set plays? When I watch the Hawks, a lot of their offense seems frantic and mostly about getting the puck to the net area. Maybe this is because I have no idea what's going on. Plus you have guys being checked into the boards a lot so sometimes it's hard to keep track of what exactly is going on.

TLDR; how often do teams run set offensive plays?

Generally, "set plays" are almost exclusively reserved for faceoff scenarios, but once set up in the offensive zone there is a basic concept that is run and ad libbed on. And yes, getting the puck to the front of the net is the primary concern.

There are four primary offensive concepts that are run: overload, positional, behind the net, and crash/funnel.

Overload (aka triangle) - Pretty similar to the triangle offense in basketball actually; the forwards form a vaguely triangular shape with one in front of the net another in the corner and the third on the boards near the circle. The idea is to outnumber the defenders in one of the lower quadrant areas and cycle the puck around until there is an open shooting lane or passing lane to guy in front of the net. This is what the Hawks play most of the time. Once in formation you'll see the forwards start to rotate (along with the "strong side" D man [the guy on the puck side]). This favors good skating teams because if one of the players in the rotation beats his man it becomes a 2 on 1 with him and the other forward closest to the net against the "weak side" defender.

Positional - considerably less skating than an overload, they basically set up in a similar set to what they would in the defensive zone: the C in the slot, wingers in the circles/corners, and the D at the points. The idea is that you get the puck down low and find a way to pass cross ice for a one-timer. This makes the goalie and D move laterally more. The passing lanes are harder to open up than in an overload (since the passes are longer) but the passes are more effective at opening up shooting lanes.

Behind the Net - watch some old Gretzky tape, the guy lived behind the net. You get a C or winger (whomever is your best passer) in behind the net, thus splitting the responsibility of the opposing D men. Once one of the defenders attacks the puck carrier he has an outlet pass to the winger on that defender's side if the other team's C doesn't rotate quickly enough. So there will either be an open guy on the boards to that side, or that winger attacks the net uncovered and (hopefully) gets the pass on his way there. Alternatively, if neither of the D men commit to attacking the puck carrier behind the net, he can make a quick move out front for a wrap around shot or to force the C out of position in order to open a passing lane.

Crash/funnel - the idea is to get 2 or 3 forwards in front of the net and take more shots from the point looking for deflections/rebounds or get one guy on the boards trying to force a pass to the other two camping in the slot (slot = area in front of the net between the circles). This is a big bodied team scheme, you need monsters that are hard to move out from the front of the net as well as big guys who can dig the puck out from a board battle and set up the other two.

Watch some "legion of doom" (mid 90s Fliyers) clips for an idea of how to work this scheme -- easily my favorite line of all time; LeClair at LW (huge guy who could dig the puck out as well as shoot), Lindros at C (Urlacher sized mother ****** with amazingly soft hands), and the RW changed a bunch between Recchi, Brind'amour, Clarke and others. [oh, and look at the silliness of LeClair's stick blade] I'll get around to a stick post later once we get general strategy out of the way.

 

[Ares]

The Kings play good hockey

/Thread

 

[DMelt36]

Generally, "set plays" are almost exclusively reserved for faceoff scenarios, but once set up in the offensive zone there is a basic concept that is run and ad libbed on. And yes, getting the puck to the front of the net is the primary concern.

There are four primary offensive concepts that are run: overload, positional, behind the net, and crash/funnel.

Overload (aka triangle) - Pretty similar to the triangle offense in basketball actually; the forwards form a vaguely triangular shape with one in front of the net another in the corner and the third on the boards near the circle. The idea is to outnumber the defenders in one of the lower quadrant areas and cycle the puck around until there is an open shooting lane or passing lane to guy in front of the net. This is what the Hawks play most of the time. Once in formation you'll see the forwards start to rotate (along with the "strong side" D man [the guy on the puck side]). This favors good skating teams because if one of the players in the rotation beats his man it becomes a 2 on 1 with him and the other forward closest to the net and the "weak side" defender.

Positional - considerably less skating than an overload, they basically set up in a similar set to what they would in the defensive zone: the C in the slot, wingers in the circles/corners, and the D at the points. The idea is that you get the puck down low and find a way to pass cross ice for a one-timer. This makes the goalie and D move laterally more. The passing lanes are harder to open up than in an overload (since the passes are longer) but the passes are more effective at opening up shooting lanes.

Behind the Net - watch some old Gretzky tape, the guy lived behind the net. You get a C or winger (whomever is your best passer) in behind the net, thus splitting the responsibility of the opposing D men. Once one of the defenders attacks the puck carrier he has an outlet pass to the winger on that defender's side if the other team's C doesn't rotate quickly enough. So there will either be an open guy on the boards to that side, or that winger attacks the net uncovered and (hopefully) gets the pass on his way there. Alternatively, if neither of the D men commit to attacking the puck carrier behind the net, he can make a quick move out front for a wrap around shot or to force the C out of position in order to open a passing lane.

Crash/funnel - the idea is to get 2 or 3 forwards in front of the net and take more shots from the point looking for deflections/rebounds or get one guy on the boards trying to force a pass to the other two camping in the slot (slot = area in front of the net between the circles). This is a big bodied team scheme, you need monsters that are hard to move out from the front of the net as well as big guys who can dig the puck out from a board battle and set up the other two.

Watch some "legion of doom" (mid 90s Fliyers) clips for an idea of how to work this scheme -- easily my favorite line of all time; LeClair at LW (huge guy who could dig the puck out as well as shoot), Lindros at C (Urlacher sized mother ****** with amazingly soft hands), and the RW changed a bunch between Recchi, Brind'amour, Clarke and others. [oh, and look at the silliness of LeClair's stick blade] I'll get around to a stick post later once we get general strategy out of the way.

Wanted to +rep this but can't at the moment. Excellent stuff.

 

[ruprecht]

I am praying we do not get these turds again in the playoffs this year. Awful.